Criminal Law

by Dharma Na Gara

Motion to Reconsider or Judicial Review or Peninjauan Kembali (PK) in Criminal Law Procedure

Motion to Reconsider or Judicial Review or Peninjauan Kembali (PK) in Indonesia’s Criminal Law Procedure/KUHAP

Motion to Reconsider or Judicial Review or Peninjuan Kembali is an extraordinary legal effort against a court decision that has obtained permanent legal force/binding as explained in Article 263 paragraph 1 of the Indonesia Criminal Law Procedure/KUHAP, namely against a court decision that has obtained permanent legal force, except for a decision of acquittal or release from all legal charges, the convict or his heirs may submit a request for judicial review to the Supreme Court.

1. Court Decisions that can be reviewed

Based on the provisions of Article 263 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, it can be explained as follows:

a. Can be submitted against all court decisions that have obtained permanent legal force

For court decisions that have permanent legal force (inkracht van gewijsde), a judicial review can be requested to the Supreme Court. As long as the decision does not have permanent legal force, judicial review efforts cannot be used. Against such decisions, only ordinary legal efforts can be taken in the form of an appeal to high court or appeal to the supreme court. The judicial review effort will only be opened after the ordinary legal efforts (in the form of an appeal to high court and appeal to the supreme court) have closed. The judicial review effort must not step over the appeal to high court and appeal to the supreme court efforts. As long as the ordinary legal efforts are still open, the ordinary legal efforts must be passed first. The judicial review process stage is the process stage that has gone beyond ordinary legal efforts.

b. Can be filed against all Court decisions

As has been emphasized, a judicial review can only be filed against a Court decision that has permanent/binding legal force. A judicial review can be filed against all decisions of the Court, and can be filed against a District Court decision, as long as the decision of that institution has been binding/permanent legal force. Likewise, a request for judicial review can be filed against a High Court decision, if the appeal to the high court request has closed/expired against that decision, therefore the High Court decision already had permanent/binding legal force. Since then, the possibility of filing a judicial review request has opened. Likewise, a request for judicial review can be filed against a Supreme Court decision, after the decision has permanent/binding legal force.

2. Those who can submit a request for judicial review

Regarding those who have the right to submit a judicial review, this is stated in Article 263 paragraph (1) KUHAP, namely:

1) The convict or

2) His/her heirs.

From the affirmation of this provision, the public prosecutor does not have the right to file a request for judicial review. The reason why the law does not give the public prosecutor the right is because this legal effort aims to protect the interests of the convict. For the interests of the convict, the law opens up the possibility of reviewing a decision that has obtained permanent legal force, therefore it should only be given to the convict or his heirs. Moreover, the other side of this extraordinary legal effort, namely in the appeal to the supreme court for the sake of the law (kasasi demi kepentingan hukum), the law has opened up the opportunity for the Attorney General to defend the public interest. If the public prosecutor’s opinion that a Court decision that has permanent legal force is detrimental to the public interest or contradicts to the objectives of the law enforcement, truth and justice, the law has opened up legal efforts for the Attorney General to file a request for the appeal to the supreme court for the sake of the law (kasasi demi kepentingan hukum). Therefore, the right to file a request for judicial review is a reciprocal right given to the convict to align the balance of the right to file an appeal to the supreme court for the sake of the law (kasasi demi kepentingan hukum) granted by the law to the public prosecutor through the Attorney General. Thus, through extraordinary legal efforts, the interests of the convict and the public interest have been fulfilled in a balanced manner. In this regard, the Constitutional Court issued Constitutional Court Verdict No. 20/PUU-XXI/2023 which stated:

• Granting the applicant’s petition in its entirety;
• Declaring Article 30C letter h and the explanation of Article 30C letter h of Law Number 11 Year 2021 concerning Amendments to Law Number 16 Year 2004 concerning the Office of the Counsel for the Prosecution of the Republic of Indonesia (State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia 2021 Number 298 Supplement to the State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia Number 6755) contradicts to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and has no binding legal force;
• Ordering the publication of this decision in the State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia as appropriate.

3. The Request for Judicial Review by Attorney

As explained, Article 263 paragraph 1 only gives the right to the convict or his/her heir to file a request for a judicial review. Does this provision prohibit legal counsel or someone authorized by the convict or his/her heir from filing a request for a judicial review? Indeed, if strictly adhering to the provisions of Article 263 paragraph 1, the law does not give the right to the attorney to file a request for a judicial review. It must be the convict or his/her heir directly. Provision like this is found in Article 244 of the Indonesia’s Criminal Law Procedure. Which determines that an appeal to the supreme court request can only be made by the defendant concerned, it cannot be authorized to legal counsel or other people. However, the provisions of Article 244 are softened by point 24 of the Attachment to the Decree of the Minister of Justice Number M.14-PW.07.03 of 2983, dated 10^th December 1983. By number 24 of the Attachment above which is an additional guideline for the implementation of the Criminal Law Procedure, it has permitted the attorney to file an appeal application to the supreme court. But in one condition, the granting of the power of attorney must be made by the defendant “specifically”. This means that the appointment of attorney to file an appeal application to the supreme court must be made by the defendant in a power of attorney specifically for the purpose of requesting an appeal application to the supreme court.

What about the request for judicial review? Could it be requested by an attorney? According to M. Yahya Harahap, S.H., in his book entitled “Pembahasan Permasalahan dan Penerapan KUHAP Pemeriksaan Sidang Pengadilan, Banding, Kasasi dan Peninjauan Kembali Edisi Kedua, Publisher Sinar Grafika, Jakarta, 2009, states “Yes”! The legal basis is to apply “consistently” the guidelines contained in number 24 of the Attachment of the Minister of Justice. The reason for applying the guidelines contained in number 24 to the judicial review application process is based on the motivation contained in the guideline itself. The motivation for allowing an attorney to file an appeal to the supreme court request is none other than for the interests and protection of the defendant’s human rights. So with the same motivation, the guideline in number 24 can be applied in a request for judicial review, for the interests and protection of the convict’s human rights. Everyone have the right to appoint a legal advisor or attorney who can be expected to defend their interests and protect human rights, don’t they?!

4. The Reasons for Judicial Review

Article 263 paragraph 2 contains the reasons that can be used as the basis for a request for a judicial review which is stated by the applicant in a letter of request for a judicial review. In the letter of request or application for a judicial review, the applicant clearly states the basis for the request. Considering the provisions of Article 264 paragraph 1 and paragraph 4, the formal requirement for determining the validity of a request for a judicial review is a letter of request for a judicial review. Without a letter of request containing the reasons as a basis, such request is considered no-exist. This opinion is supported by Article 264 paragraph 2 and paragraph 4 which state:

• Article 1, the last sentence, emphasizes that the applicant must clearly state the reason for the request for a judicial review.
• Article 4 emphasizes that if the applicant for a judicial review is a convict who does not understand the law, the clerk, when receiving the request for a judicial review, obligated ask the applicant for the reason and for that the clerk will make a letter requesting a judicial review.

Based on the above statement, the formal requirement for a request for judicial review is a letter of request containing the reason(s) that form the basis for the request for judicial review. It does not matter whether the letter of request containing the reason(s) is made by the convict himself or the clerk of the District Court in accordance with Article 264 paragraph 4. What is important as a valid requirement for the request, must be submitted in a letter of request for judicial review which explaining the reasons underlying the request. And the reasons that form the basis for the request for judicial review have been detailed by law in Article 263 paragraph 2 and paragraph 3 of Indonesia’s Criminal Law Procedure. However, the main reasons that can be used as the basis for a request for judicial review are the matters mentioned one by one in Article 263 paragraph 2.

a. If There is a new condition

The first reason that can be used as a basis for a request for a judicial review is a “new condition” or novum. New circumstance that can be used as a basis for a request is new condition that have the nature and quality of “giving rise to strong allegation/suspicion”:

• If only the new condition was known or discovered and presented during the trial, it could be a factor and reason for issuing a verdict of acquittal or a verdict of release from all legal charges, or
• If only the new condition was discovered and known during the trial, it can be a reason and factor for issuing a verdict stating that the public prosecutor’s charges were unacceptable or
• it can be used as a reason and factor for issuing a verdict by applying lighter criminal provisions.

b. If there are conflict of verdicts in various verdicts

The second reason that can be used as a basis for a request for motion to reconsideration/judicial review is if various decisions/verdicts contain:

1. A statement that something has been proven,
2. Then the statement regarding the proven of the thing or situation was used as the basis and reason for the decision in a case,
3. However, in other case decision(s), the things or conditions that were declared proven are contradictory between one decision and another.

c. If there is a clear error in the decision.

The third reason that is used as the basis for submitting a request for motion to reconsideration/judicial review, if the decision is clear or clearly visible:

1. The Judge’s made a mistake, or
2. The Judge’s error.

Judges, as humans, are not free from mistakes and errors. Mistakes and errors can occur at all levels of the court.

5. Several Principles Determined in Judicial Review/Motion to Reconsider Efforts

a. The Sentence Imposed Must Not Exceed the Original Verdict

This principle is regulated in Article 266 paragraph 3 Indonesia’s Criminal Law Procedure/KUHAP, which emphasizes that the sentence imposed in a judicial review decision “must not exceed the sentence imposed in the original verdict”. The Supreme Court may not impose a verdict that exceeds the original criminal verdict. What is permitted is to apply lighter criminal provisions as stipulated in Article 266 paragraph 2 letter b number 4. The principle regulated in Article 266 paragraph 3 is in line with the objectives contained in the Judicial Review Institution, which is intended to provide an opportunity for the Convict to defend his interests, so that he/she can be free from incorrect law enforcement. Therefore, this effort provides an opportunity to defend his/her interests, it is not appropriate if the means that provide an opportunity to paralyze a verdict that has obtained permanent legal force, backfires and harms the applicant. This is different from the appeal to the high court or the appeal to supreme court level decision, in this process the decision has not yet got permanent legal force, so it is still permitted to impose a decision either in the form of aggravating or mitigating the defendant.

b. Request for Judicial Review/Motion to Reconsider Does Not Suspend the Implementation of the Decision

The second principle in the judicial review/motion to reconsider is “not absolutely” suspending or stopping the implementation of the execution. Judicial Review is not a reason that hinders or even eliminates the implementation of the decision. The process of requesting judicial review continues, but the implementation of the decision also continues. Is this provision “imperative” or not? According to M. Yahya Harahap, S.H., in his book “Pembahasan Permasalahan dan Penerapan KUHAP Pemeriksaan Sidang Pengadilan, Banding, Kasasi dan Peninjauan Kembali Edisi Kedua, Penerbit Sinar Grafika, Jakarta, 2009, he said that it is “not imperative” rigidly! It can be reviewed casuistically, depending on the condition that include the request for judicial review. Still according to M. Yahya Harahap, S.H., if based on the examination of the District Court, the reasons submitted by the convict are such that their nature and quality are truly believed to be able to paralyze the decision for which judicial review is requested, it is wiser to suspend the implementation of the execution. It is true that we admit that the judicial review effort is not smooth and easy, and as said, out of many requests, only one or two are justified. However, in exceptional cases, a suspension or termination of the implementation of the decision can be carried out, so that the provisions of Article 268 paragraph 1 can be slightly relaxed: the request for judicial review “does not absolutely” suspend or stop the implementation of the decision. However, the recommendation to soften the wording of Article 268 paragraph 1 should not be misused. A haphazard attitude creates danger and shock in the implementation of law enforcement. What is desired is a mature and reasoned attitude and policy that is related to the type of crime as well as to the nature and quality of the reasons that are the basis for the request for judicial review.

For more information, please consult your problem with us.

Source:

Yahya Harahap, S.H., 2009, Pembahasan Permasalahan dan Penerapan KUHAP Pemeriksaan sidang Pengadilan, Banding, Kasasi dan Peninjauan Kembali, Sinar Grafika, Jakarta.

Kitab Undang-undang Hukum Acara Pidana (KUHAP)/Indonesia’s Criminal Law Procedure.

https://www.mkri.id/index.php?page=web.Berita&id=19106 (accessed date 18 December 2024 time: 7.09AM).

by Dharma Na Gara

Rights of Suspect and Defendant

Rights of Suspect and Defendant

Indonesia’s Criminal Law Procedure (Kitab Undang-undang Hukum Acara Pidana/KUHAP)

Article 50 KUHAP

(1) The suspect has the right to be immediately examined by investigators and can then be referred to the public prosecutor.

(2) The suspect has the right to have his case immediately brought to court by the public prosecutor.

(3) The defendant has the right to be immediately tried by the Court.

Article 51 KUHAP, to prepare a defense:

(1) The suspect has the right to be informed clearly in a language he/she understands about what is suspected of him/her when the examination begins.

(2) The defendant has the right to be informed clearly in a language he/she understands about what he/she is accused of.

Article 52 KUHAP

During examinations at the investigative and court levels, suspects or defendants have the right to provide information freely to investigators or judges.

Article 53 KUHAP

(1) During examinations at the investigation and court stage, suspect or defendant have the right to receive the assistance of an interpreter as intended in Article 177 at any time.

(2) In the event that the suspect or defendant is mute/speech impaired and the provisions as intended in Article 178 shall apply.

Article 177 KUHAP

(1) If the defendant or witness does not understand Indonesia Language, the chief judge at the trial appoints an interpreter who swears or promises to correctly translate everything that must be translated.

(2) If a person cannot be a witness in a case, he/she cannot either be an interpreter in that case.

Article 178 KUHAP

(1) If the defendant or witness is mute and/or deaf either cannot write, the chief judge at the trial shall appoint an interpreter person who is good at getting along with the defendant or witness.

(2) If the defendant or witness is mute and/or deaf but can write, the chief judge at the trial shall convey all questions or warnings to him/her in writing and the defendant or witness is instructed to write his/her answers and then all questions and answers must be read.

Article 54 KUHAP

For the purposes of defense, a suspect or defendant has the right to receive legal assistance from one or more legal advisors during the time and at each level of examination, according to the procedures specified in this law.

Article 55 KUHAP

To obtain legal advice as stated in Article 54, the suspect or defendant has the right to choose his/her own legal adviser.

Article 56 KUHAP

(1) In the event that a suspect or defendant is suspected or accused of committing a crime which is punishable by the death penalty or a sentence of fifteen years or more or for those who are incapacitated/poor who are threatened with a sentence of five years or more who do not have their own legal counsel, the official who concerned at all levels of examination in the judicial process are obliged to appoint legal advisors for them.

(2) Every legal advisor appointed to act as intended in paragraph (1), provides his assistance free of charge.

Article 57 KUHAP

(1) A suspect or defendant who is subject to detention has the right to contact his legal advisor in accordance with the provisions of this law.

(2) A suspect or defendant of foreign nationality who is subject to detention has the right to contact and speak with representatives of his country in dealing with the case process.

Article 58 KUHAP

A suspect or defendant who is subject to detention has the right to contact and receive a visit from his personal doctor for health purposes, whether related to the case process or not.

Article 59 KUHAP

A suspect or defendant who is subject to detention has the right to be informed about his or her detention by an authorized official, at all levels of examination in the judicial process, to his or her family or other people in the same household as the suspect or defendant or other people whose assistance is needed by the suspect or defendant to obtain legal assistance or guarantee for its suspension.

Article 60 KUHAP

The suspect or defendant has the right to contact and to get visitation from parties who have familial or other relationships with the suspect or defendant in order to obtain guarantees for suspension of detention or to seek legal assistance.

Article 61 KUHAP

The suspect or defendant has the right directly or through his legal advisor to contact and receive visits from his relatives in matters that have nothing to do with the suspect’s or defendant’s case for work purposes or family interests.

Article 61 KUHAP

The suspect or defendant has the right directly or through his legal advisor to contact and receive visits from his relatives in matters that have nothing to do with the suspect’s or defendant’s case for work purposes or family interests.

Article 62 KUHAP

(1) A suspect or defendant has the right to send letters to his legal advisor, and receive letters from his legal advisor and relatives whenever required by him, for this purpose the suspect or defendant is provided with stationery.

(2) Correspondence between a suspect or defendant and his legal advisor or relatives is not examined by investigators, public prosecutors, judges or state detention officials unless there is sufficient reason to suspect that the correspondence has been misused.

(3) In the event that a letter to a suspect or defendant is reviewed or examined by an investigator, public prosecutor, judge or state detention center official, this matter is notified to the suspect or defendant and the letter is sent back to the sender after affixing a stamp saying “has been examined”.

Article 63 KUHAP

The suspect or defendant has the right to contact and receive visits from churchman/priest.

Article 64 KUHAP

The defendant has the right to be tried in a court hearing that is open to the public.

Article 65 KUHAP

The suspect or defendant has the right to seek and present witnesses and/or someone who has special expertise to provide information that is favorable to him.

Article 66 KUHAP

The suspect or defendant is not burdened with the obligation of authentication.

Article 67 KUHAP

The defendant or public prosecutor has the right to request an appeal against the decision of first stage Court, except for the decision of acquittal, free from all charges regarding the issue of inaccurate application of the law and the Court’s decision in a speedy proceeding.

Article 68 KUHAP

The suspect or defendant has the right to demand compensation and rehabilitation as regulated in Article 95 and following.

For more information, please consult your problem with us.

Source:

Undang-undang No. 8 tahun 1981 tentang Hukum Acara Pidana

by Dharma Na Gara

Medical records

Medical records

Doctors who practice medicine are obliged to make notes which must be made immediately after the patient receives services. Every health service must record and document the results of examinations, treatment, actions and other services that have been provided to patients.

Article 46 Indonesia’s Law Number 29 Year 2004 concerning Medical Practice determines:

• Every doctor or dentist in carrying out medical practice is obliged to keep a medical record;
• Medical records as intended in paragraph 1 must be completed immediately after the patient has finished receiving health services;
• Every medical record must contain the name, time and signature of the officer who provides the service or action.

From the provisions of Article 46 of the Medical Practice Law above, it is clear that the recording referred to is medical records. In practice, the term medical record has developed into other terms, namely:

1. Medical Document = Dokumen Medis;
2. Medical Notes = Catatan Medis;
3. Medical Record = Rekam Medis;
4. Health Record = Rekaman Kesehatan;
5. Personal Health Record = Rekaman Kesehatan Pribadi;
6. Medical Report = Laporan Medis.

Every recording (medical record) that is made must contain the name, time and signature of the doctor, dentist or certain health worker who provides health services directly. In the event that an error occurs in recording, correction must be made immediately by crossing out without removing the corrected note and initialing the doctor, dentist or health service worker concerned. Recording and documenting the results of examinations, treatment, actions and other services that have been provided to patients, is what generally called a medical record.

Organizing medical records at a health service facility is one way to measure the quality of service at that health service. Based on the data in the medical record, it will be possible to assess whether the service provided is of good quality or not, and whether it meets standards or not. For this reason, medical records were originally regulated in Minister of Health Regulation Number 749a/MENKES/PER/XII/1989 concerning Medical Records, then updated in Minister of Health Regulation Number 269/MENKES/PER/III/2008 concerning Medical Records. This is further regulated in the Regulation of the Minister of Health of the Republic of Indonesia Number 24 Year 2022 concerning Medical Records.

Meaning of Medical Records:

1. In article 1 letters 1, 6 and 7 of the Minister of Health Regulation Number 269/MENKES/PER/III/2008, what is meant by medical record is a file containing notes and documents regarding patient identity, examination, treatment, procedures and other services that have been provided to the patient. Notes are writings made by a doctor or dentist regarding all actions taken to patients in the context of providing health services. Documents are notes from doctors, dentists and/or certain health workers, reports of supporting examination results, daily observation and treatment records and all records in the form of radiology photos, imaging and electro-diagnostic records.

2. In the explanation of Article 46 paragraph (1) of Law Number 29 Year 2004 concerning Medical Practice, what is meant by medical records are files containing notes and documents regarding patient identity, examinations, treatment, procedures and other services that have been provided to patient.

3. In the Regulation of the Minister of Health of the Republic of Indonesia Number 55 Year 2013 concerning the Implementation of Medical Recorder Work, Specifically in Article 1 paragraph (2) Medical Records are files containing notes and documents regarding patient identity, examination, treatment, procedures and other services to patients at Health facility.

4. According to Ery Rustiyanto, medical records are who, where and how the patient was treated while in hospital to complete the medical record, it must have sufficient written data in a series to produce a diagnosis, guarantee, treatment and final result[1].

5. According to Gemala R. Hatta, a medical record is a file containing notes and documents regarding patient identity, examination, treatment, procedures and other services provided to patients in health service facility[2].

6. According to the Regulation of the Minister of Health of the Republic of Indonesia Number 24 Year 2022 concerning Medical Records, Medical Records are documents that contain the patient’s identity, examination, treatment, actions and other services that have been provided to the patient.

The content in Medical Records

According to the Regulation of the Minister of Health of the Republic of Indonesia Number 24 Year 2022 concerning Medical Records Article 26 paragraph 6 states:

The contents of the medical record as intended in paragraph 2 at least consist of:

1. Patient identity;
2. Results of physical and supporting examinations;
3. Diagnosis, treatment, and health service follow-up plans; And
4. Name and signature of the Health Worker providing Health services.

According to the Regulation of the Minister of Health of the Republic of Indonesia Number 24 Year 2022 concerning Medical Records Article 26 paragraph 7 states: Medical records as intended in paragraph (2) must be made by the person in charge of the service.

For further information, please consult your problem with us.

Source:

Zaeni Asyhadie, 2017, Aspek-Aspek Hukum Kesehatan di Indonesia, Rajawali Pers, Depok.

Peraturan Menteri Kesehatan Republik Indonesia No. 24 Tahun 2022 tentang Rekam Medis (Regulation of the Minister of Health of the Republic of Indonesia Number 24 Year 2022 concerning Medical Records).

[1] Ery Rustiyanto, 2009, Etika Profesi Perekam Medis dan Informasi Kesehatan, Graha Ilmu, Yogyakarta, h. 5.

[2] Gemala R. Hatta, 2008, Pedoman Manajemen Informasi Kesehatan di Sarana Pelayanan Kesehatan, Universitas Indonesia, Jakarta, h. 73.

by Dharma Na Gara

Suspension of Detention

Suspension of Detention

Suspension of detention is regulated in Article 31 of the Indonesia’s Criminal Law Procedure. According to the provisions of Article 31 regarding the definition of suspending the detention of a suspect or defendant from detention, removing the suspect or defendant from detention before the time limit for the detention expires.

Official and legal detention still exists and has not yet expired, however, the implementation of the detention that the suspect or defendant still has to undergo is suspended, even though the detention period ordered has not yet expired. With a suspension of detention, a suspect or defendant is released from detention while the legal and official detention period is running.

Suspension of detention is not the same as release from detention. The differences are mainly seen from a legal perspective as well as the reasons and requirements that follow the action of implementing a suspension than release from detention. In terms of law, implementation and requirements:

• The suspension of detention is still valid and official and is still within the detention time limit permitted by law. However, the implementation of detention is stopped by releasing the detainee after the detaining agency determines the terms of the suspension which must be fulfilled by the detainee or other person acting to guarantee the suspension.
• While release from detention must be based on statutory provisions. Without fulfilling the elements stipulated by law, release from detention cannot be carried out. For example, because the detention carried out is illegal and contrary to the law or because the detention time limit imposed has expired, the detainee must be released by law. Or it could also be because the length of detention served has accordanced with the criminal law imposed by the court which has permanent legal force. Apart from that, in terms of implementing the release of prisoners, it is carried out without bail conditions.

Talking about the issue of suspension of detention as regulated in Article 31 of the Indonesia’s Criminal Law Procedure, it does not fully regulate the procedures for its implementation, neither as the conditions and guarantees that can be imposed on detainees or the person providing collateral. Therefore, Article 31 of the Indonesia’s Criminal Law Procedure still requires implementing regulations which have recently been stipulated in various regulations:

• Regarding guarantees for suspension of detention, it is regulated in Chapter X, Article 35 and Article 36 of PP No. 27/1983.
• The implementation of suspension of detention is regulated in Chapter IV, Article 25 of Minister of Justice Regulation No. M.04.UM.01.06/1983 and number 8 of the Attachment to Minister of Justice Decree No. M.14-PW.07.03/1983.

The occurrence of suspension of detention is confirmed in Article 31 paragraph (1) of the Indonesia’s Criminal Law Procedure. According to the confirmation contained in this provision, suspension of detention occurs:

• Due to the request of the suspect or defendant;
• The request is approved by the detaining agency or which is legally responsible for the detention with the specified conditions and guarantees and judicially for the detention with the specified conditions and guarantees and
• There is agreement from the detainee to comply with the specified conditions and fulfill the specified guarantees.

As for what conditions must be determined by the authorized agency, it is not specified in Article 31 of the Indonesia’s Criminal Law Procedure. Confirmation and details of the conditions that must be stipulated in the suspension of detention are further stated in the explanation of Article 31 of the Indonesia’s Criminal Law Procedure. From this explanation, confirmation of what conditions can be set by the detaining agency can be obtained.

• Compulsory to report;
• Not leaving the house, or
• Not leaving the town.

These are the conditions that can be set in granting a suspension of detention.

Is the collateral element a determining factor in granting a suspension of detention? Is the collateral element similar in function to the terms of suspension? Stipulation of suspension conditions is a condition sine quanon factor in suspension of detention. Without stipulation of terms of suspension, it is considered invalid and contrary to Article 31 paragraph (1) of the Indonesia’s Criminal Law Procedure. What about the stipulation of bail, is the stipulation of bail is a condition for granting a suspension of detention? Absolutely not! Stipulation of collateral in suspended detention is “facultative”, in accordance with the provisions of Article 31 paragraph (1), in the sentence that reads: “with or without collateral of money or person”. From the sound of this sentence, money collateral or person “can” be determined by the detaining agency in granting suspension. If that is the case, the nature of the collateral stipulation is facultative, it is up to the opinion and judgment of the detaining agency to burden the person concerned with the collateral.

For further information, please consult your problem with us.

Source:

Indonesia’s Criminal Law Prosedure/KUHAP;

Yahya Harahap, S.H., 2009, Pembahasan Permasalahan dan Penerapan KUHAP Penyidikan dan Penuntutan, Sinar Grafika, Jakarta.

by Dharma Na Gara

Eksepsi/Objection in Indonesia’s Criminal Law Procedure

Eksepsi/Exception

The definition of an exception is:

• A plea or defense that does not address or is not addressed to the “main material” of the indictment.
• But the objection or defense is directed at the “formal” defects inherent in the indictment.

In Article 156 paragraph (1) of the Indonesia’s Criminal Law Procedure (KUHAP), the definition of exception is not clearly formulated. The term used is “objection”. The defendant or his legal advisor is given the right to raise objections. The meaning of objection mentioned in this article is closer in meaning to objection in the Common Law system, which means that the case filed against the defendant contains improper (inappropriate) or illegal (invalid) procedural rules.

Timing of Raising an Exception

If you pay attention to Article 156 paragraph (1), filing objections involving defense for “formal” reasons by the defendant or legal advisor is a “right” with the following provisions:

1. In principle, it must be submitted at the “first hearing”;
2. It is “immediately” or “after” the public prosecutor reads the indictment;
3. If the application is made outside the stated grace period, the exception does not need to be responded to by the public prosecutor and the District Court, except regarding the exception to the authority to adjudicate as mentioned in Article 156 paragraph 7.

This principle is concluded from the provisions of article 156 paragraph 2 which states: if the judge accepts the objection of the defendant or legal advisor, the case will not be examined further. This means that the process of filing an objection is between the stages of reading the indictment. The examination of the main subject matter of the case is stopped if the objection is received. On the other hand, the examination of the main subject matter of the case continues directly if the objection is rejected.

Exception Classifications

There are several classifications of exceptions found in judicial practice, but in this article only some of them are discussed.

1. Exception of Judicial Authority

It is called “exception without authority” to judge or exception of incompetency (exception van onbevoegheid), in the sense that the Court to which the case is delegated has no authority to judge, which is classified as follows:

• Not having absolute authority.

The issue of absolute authority to adjudicate (absolute competence) arises, as a result of Article 10 of Law Number 14 year 1970 which has determined and divided “substantive jurisdiction” for each judicial environment on one side and on the other side due to the formation of a special type of court whose absolute authority is given to that special court (for instance juvenile court).

• Relatively incompetent.

It is said that the relative authority to try cases (relative competence) is based on the “legal area” or “jurisdictional area” factor of a court.

Each District Court or High Court has a limited area or jurisdiction. The benchmarks for determining regional boundaries or legal territories are basically adjusted to the Level I (provincial) and Level II (Regency or Municipality) government systems.

The basic basis for determining the authority to try any District Court or any criminal offense that occurs, refers to the provisions:

1. Article 84 paragraph 1 of the Criminal Law Procedure/KUHAP: Locus delicti/crime scene;
2. Article 84 paragraph 2 of the Criminal Law Procedure: The district court in whose jurisdiction the defendant resides, last resided, at the place where he was found or detained, is only authorized to try the defendant’s case, if the place of residence of most of the witnesses summoned is closer to the location of the district court than the location of the district court in whose area the crime was committed;
3. Article 85 Criminal Law Procedure: authority over the “appointment” of the Minister of Justice;
4. Article 86 of the Criminal Law Procedure: The authority of the Central Jakarta District Court is based on law for criminal acts committed abroad.

It should be remembered that exception to relative competency is in principle submitted at the first level of the court or the District Court. However, this does not reduce the right of the defendant or legal advisor to submit an appeal to the High Court by entering it into the memorandum of appeal.

In fact, because the authority to try is a provision which is in the nature of a “public order”, the High Court ex officio has the authority to examine and assess whether the District Court violated the principle of relative competence in try the case, even though this was not raised as an exception in the first level trial. Such an application is not solely based on public reasons but is also based on the wishes contained in Article 156 paragraph (7) of the Criminal Law Procedure/KUHAP, which provides an ex officio function for judges to examine and decide on competency even though it was not submitted as an objection (exception).

2. Exception of Authority to prosecute, aborted

Another exception which is not mentioned in Article 156 paragraph 1 of the Criminal Law Procedure, but it is found in other statutory provisions, including in the Criminal Code, is the exception which states the “authority” of the public prosecutor to prosecute “aborted” or “abolished”. The abolition or aborted of prosecutorial authority is due to certain factors mentioned in the provisions of the relevant articles.

Regarding this type of exception, the most important of them are:

1. Exception judicate or nebis in idem (Article 76 of the Indonesia’s Criminal Code). Factors that eliminate prosecutorial authority in this exception: the criminal act for which the defendant is accused, has already been charged, examined and tried and the verdict: Has binding legal force and The decision is positive, namely being convicted or acquitted or released from all legal charges.
2. Exception in tempores (Article 78 KUHP/Indonesia’s Criminal Code). The criminal prosecution filed against the defendant exceeds the time limit specified by law (that the time prescribed by law for bringing such action or offense has expired). As is known, Chapter VIII of the Criminal Code, starting from Articles 78-82, regulates the system for implementing the expiration for criminal prosecution.
3. The defendant died. In accordance with the provisions of Article 77 of the Indonesian’s Criminal Code/KUHP, the authority to prosecute criminal charges is “abolished” on the grounds that the defendant “died”.

3. The Exception of the Public Prosecutor’s Claims/Charges is Unacceptable

The standard for filing an exception or passing a decision which state that: the public prosecutor’s claim cannot be accepted if the examination procedures which was carried out do not meet the requirements specified or required by law. Among other things, this group can include:

• The investigation examination exception does not meet the requirements of Article 56 paragraph 1 of the Indonesia’s Criminal Law Procedure/KUHAP. Article 56 paragraph 1 outlines the Miranda Rule which emphasizes that, in every prosecution or trial, the suspect or the defendant accompanied by a legal advisor, this provision is a “requirement condition” by law if the criminal act that is alleged or charged is punishable by the death penalty or 15 year or more or for those who are incapacitated to pay for a lawyer and are threatened with a sentence of 5 years or more who do not have their own legal advisor/lawyer, the relevant officer at all levels of examination in the judicial process is obliged to appoint a legal advisor/lawyer for them. Article 56 paragraph 2 of the Indonesia’s Criminal Law Procedure: every legal advisor appointed to act as intended in paragraph 1, provides his assistance free of charge. If the provisions of Article 56 paragraph 1 is not fulfilled, it is deemed that the examination does not meet the requirement condition by the law, which results in “the public prosecutor’s charges are unacceptable” (MA/Supreme Court Decision No. 1565 K/Pid/1991, 16 September 1993).
• The exception for examination that does not meet the Klacht delict. The criminal offense charged is “complaint offense” (klacht delict), but it turns out that the prosecution was brought against the defendant “without a complaint” from the “victim” or from the person mentioned in the relevant offense article or the complaint period outlined in Chapter VII (Articles 72-75 of the Criminal Code/KUHP, is not fulfilled, therefore the conditions requested or determined by the law are not fulfilled by the investigator and public prosecutor (no complaint). This means that the public prosecutor’s charges against the defendant do not meet the requirements of the law, so the demand of criminal responsibility for the defendant is “unacceptable”.

4. Exception Release from all legal charges

This exception is constructed from the provisions of Article 67 of the Indonesia’s Criminal Law Procedure/KUHAP, which introduces a form of District Court decision “release from all legal charges” or onslag van rechtvervolging.

Furthermore, what is mentioned in Article 67 regarding this exception, is emphasized again in Article 191 paragraph 2 of the Criminal Law Procedure, which provides a benchmark regarding the meaning of a decision “release from all legal charges”, namely “if the act charged against the defendant is proven, but does not constitute a criminal act.

In general practice, what is often used as the basis for passing a decision release from all legal charges is if the criminal act charged contains a “civil” dispute, so that what is charged is basically a “civil dispute” which must be resolved through the civil court process.

For more information, please consult with us.

Source:

Kitab Undang-undang Hukum Pidana/KUHP (Indonesia’s Criminal Code).

Kitab Undang-undang Hukum Acara Pidana/KUHAP (Indonesia’s Criminal Law Procedure).

Yahya Harahap, S.H., 2009, Pembahasan Permasalahan dan Penerapan KUHAP Pemeriksaan sidang Pengadilan, Banding, Kasasi dan Peninjauan Kembali, Sinar Grafika, Jakarta.

by Dharma Na Gara

Pretrial

Pretrial is not a self-judicial institution. But it is only the granting of new power and function that the Indonesia Criminal Law Procedure (KUHAP) has delegated to each District Court, as an additional authority and function of the District Courts that have existed so far. If all this time the authority and function of the District Court are trial and decide criminal and civil cases as the main task, then it is given additional tasks to assess whether legitimate or illegitimate the detention, confiscation, termination of interrogation or termination of prosecution by interrogators or public prosecutors, which the authority is given to the Pretrial. The matters described above can be read in the Article 1 point 10 of the Indonesia Criminal Law Procedure (KUHAP), which confirms: Pretrial is the authority of the District Court to examine and decide according to the law regarding:

1. Whether the arrest and/or detention is legitimate or not at the request of the suspect or his/her family or other party on the suspect’s behalf;
2. Whether the termination of the interrogation or the termination of the prosecution is legitimate or not at the request for the sake of upholding the law and justice;
3. Request for compensation or rehabilitation by the suspect or his/her family or another party on his/her behalf whose case was not lodge to the court.

What it is regulated in Article 1 point 10 of the Indonesia Criminal Law Procedure (KUHAP) is emphasized in Article 77 of the Indonesia Criminal Law Procedure (KUHAP) which explains: The District Court has the authority to examine and decide, as regulated in this law regarding:

1. Whether the arrest, detention, termination of the interrogation or termination of the prosecution are legitimate or not;
2. Compensation and/or rehabilitation for a person whose criminal case is terminated at the level of interrogation or prosecution.

For more information, please schedule a meeting with us.

Source:

KUHAP (Kitab Undang-undang Hukum Acara Pidana).

Yahya Harahap, S.H., 2009, Pembahasan Permasalahan dan Penerapan KUHAP, Pemeriksaan Sidang Pengadilan, Banding, Kasasi dan Peninjauan Kembali, Sinar Grafika, Jakarta.

by Dharma Na Gara

Evidences in Indonesia’s Criminal Law Procedure

Evidences in Indonesia’s Criminal Law Procedure
According to Article 184 paragraph (1) of the Indonesian Criminal Law Procedure (KUHAP/Kitab Undang-undang Hukum Acara Pidana),
A. Witness statements;
B. Expert testimony;
C. Letter;
D. Clue;
E. Statement of the accused/the defendant.

A. Witness Statement
Requirements for a valid witness statement:
1) Must take an oath or promise;
2) Statements of witnesses who are valuable as evidence according to Article 1 number 27 of the Indonesia’s Criminal Procedure/KUHAP:

i. What the witness saw him/herself;
ii. Witness heard him/herself;
iii. What the witness experienced him/herself;
iv. As well as giving the reasons for his/her knowledge.

Regarding this witness statement, there are expansion based on the decision of the Republic Indonesia Constitutional Court Number 65/PUU-VIII/2010 regarding “testimonium de auditu” or hearsay evidence.

3) Witness testimony must be given at a court hearing in accordance with the affirmation of Article 185 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Law Procedure.
4) The testimony of a single witness is considered insufficient (unnus testis nullus testis).
5) The testimony of several witnesses that stand alone without any correlation with one another is just a waste of time.

In term of the exceptions that free a person from the obligation to be a witness, they can be grouped:

1. People who cannot be heard and “can resign”;
2. Those who “could ask for release”;
3. Those who “may be examined without an oath”.

Ad.1 a person whose testimony cannot be heard and who “can resign” is associated with the factor of “kinship” between the defendant and the witness by blood or kinship, contained in Article 168 of the Criminal Law Procedure:

Unless otherwise stipulated in this law, statements which cannot be heard and can withdraw as a witness:

a. Blood relatives or marriage relatives in a straight line up or down to the third degree of the defendant or co-defendant;
b. Relatives of the defendant or co-defendant, mother’s or father’s siblings, also those who are related by marriage and the children of the defendant’s relatives up to the third degree;
c. The husband or wife of the defendant even though they’ve divorced or who are together as defendant.

If it’s linked with Article 169 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Law Procedure:

a. In principle, people who are related by blood, marriage and marital ties with the defendant “cannot” be heard as a witness. They are not allowed to be witnesses, even though they may be heard without an oath (Article 169 paragraph (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code)
b. However, if they “want” to be examined as witnesses to testify under oath, their wish to become witnesses can only be carried out under the condition: “if the public prosecutor and the defendant expressly agree to it”. Means that a person who has a family relationship or marital ties with the defendant as referred to in Article 168 of the Criminal Law Procedure can become a witness if he himself wishes and this wish must be “unequivocally” approved by the public prosecutor and the accused/defendant;
c. On the other hand, even if the public prosecutor or the defendant expressly ask the person to be a witness, if he/she does not wish, thus he/she “cannot be obliged” to be a witness.

ad. 2 Those who can ask to be “released as witnesses”

Based on the provisions of Article 170 of the Criminal Law Procedure, there are a group of people who “can ask to be released” from the obligation to provide testimony as witnesses. Regarding the issue of self-liberation as a witness, but it is not absolute.

Article 170 of the Criminal Law Procedure states:

1) They because of their job, dignity or position are required to keep secrets, can ask to be released from the obligation to provide testimony as witnesses, namely about things that are trusted to them.
2) The judge determines whether all the reasons for the request are valid or not.

ad. 3 Those who “may be examined without an oath”.

According to Article 171 of the Criminal Law Procedure: those who may be examined to give statements without being sworn in/taken an oath are:

a. Children who haven’t fifteen years old either haven’t married;
b. People who have memory ill or mentally ill, although sometimes regain their good memories.

B. Expert Statement

Article 186 KUHAP: Expert testimony is what the expert states in the court. Meanwhile, article 1 number 28 of the Criminal Law Procedure states: expert testimony is information given by a person who has special expertise on the matters needed to enlightened on a criminal case for the purposes of examination.

C. Letter

Article 187 of the Criminal Law Procedure states: the letter as referred to in Article 184 paragraph (1) letter c, made under an official oath or confirmed by oath are:

a. Minutes and other letters in an official form made by the authorized public official or made before him, containing information about events or circumstances that he heard, saw or experienced himself, accompanied by clear and firm reasons regarding the statement he/she made;
b. Letters which made according to the provisions of laws and regulations or letters made by officials regarding matters that are included in the management for which they are responsible and which are intended for the authentication of a situation.
c. A statement from an expert containing an opinion based on his/her expertise regarding a matter or a situation that has been officially requested from him.
d. Another letters which can only be valid if it has correlation with the contents of other evidences.

D. Clue
Regulated in Article 188 of the Criminal Law Code/KUHAP.
(1) Clues are actions, events or circumstances which due to their correspondence, both between one and another, as well as with the criminal act itself, indicate that a criminal act has occurred and who the perpetrator is.
(2) Clue as referred to in paragraph (1) can only be obtained from:

a. Witness statement;
b. Letter;
c. Defendant’s statement.

(3) The evaluation and strength of authentication of a clue in each specific situation is carried out by a judge who is wise and prudent after he has conducted an examination with full accuracy and precision based on his conscience.

E. Statement of the Defendant

It is found in Article 189 KUHAP
(1) The testimony of the defendant is what the defendant stated at the trial regarding the actions he/she had committed or which he/she knew or experienced himself/herself.
(2) The testimony of the defendant which was given outside the trial can be used to help find evidence at trial, as long as the statement is supported by valid evidence insofar as it concerns the matter against which he/she is charged.
(3) The testimony of the defendant can only be used against him/herself.
(4) The testimony of the defendant alone is not sufficient to prove that he/she is guilty of committing the act he/she was charged with, but must be accompanied by other evidence.

Article 40 KUHAP: In the case of being caught red-handed, investigating officer may confiscate objects and tools that are in fact or reasonably suspected to have been used to commit a crime or other objects that can be used as evidence.

Article 42 KUHAP (1) The investigating officer has the authority to order the person who controls the object which can be confiscated, to hand over the goods to him for the purposes of examination and the person who surrenders the goods must be given a receipt.

Apart from the evidences mentioned above, there are also some evidences such as emails, screenshots, videos, photos, etc., that are regulated in the Information and Electronic Transactions Law.

For more information, please consult your problem with us.

Source:
Kitab Undang-undang Hukum Acara Pidana/KUHAP/Indonesian Criminal Law Procedure;
M. Yahya Harahap, S.H., 2009, Pembahasan Permasalahan dan Penerapan KUHAP Pemeriksaan sidang Pengadilan, Banding, Kasasi dan Peninjauan Kembali, Sinar Grafika, Jakarta.

by Dharma Na Gara

Criminology

Criminology is a new branch of science. In contrast to the criminal law that appears once humans were in society. Criminology had begun to develop in 1850 together with sociology, anthropology and psychology. Starting from the thought that humans are wolves to another humans (homo homini lupus), always selfish and not concerned with others. Therefore, a norm is needed to regulate his life. This is very important in order to ensure a sense of security for other humans.

The name of criminology given by P. Topinard (1830-1911) a French anthropologist, literally comes from the words “Crimen” which means crime or criminals and “Logos” which means science; then criminology literally means the science of crime or criminals. Several scholars provide different understanding of this criminology. Among them is Bonger who provides a definition of criminology as a science that aims to investigate the symptoms of crime broadly.

One of the well-known theories of criminology is the Differential Association theory.

Differential Association Theory

Sutherland had found the term differential association to describe the process of learning criminal behavior through social interaction. Everyone, according to him, may have contact (relationship) with “definitions favorable to violation of law” or “definitions unfavorable to violation of law”.

The ratio of these definitions or views on crime – whether criminal or non-criminal influences are stronger in a person’s life determines whether or not he adheres to crime as an accepted way of life. In other words, the ratio of definitions (criminal to non-criminal) determines whether a person will engage in criminal behavior.

Sutherland introduced differential association theory in his textbook Principle of Criminology in 1939. Since then, the scholars have read, tested, retested, and sometimes criticized this theory, which claimed to explain the development of all criminal behavior.

Differential association is based on nine propositions, they are:

1) Criminal behavior is learned.

2) Criminal behavior is learned in interaction with other people in the communication process. A person does not simply become a criminal just because he lives in a criminal environment. Crime is learned by participating with others in both verbal and non-verbal communication.

3) The principal part of the learning of criminal behavior occurs within intimate personal groups. Family and close friends have the greatest influence in studying deviant behavior. Their communications far much more than the mass media, such as films, television, and newspapers.

4) When criminal behavior is learned, the learning includes (a) techniques of committing the crime, which are sometimes very complicated, sometimes very simple and (b) the specific direction of motives, drives, rationalizations, and attitudes. Young Delinquents not only learn how to steal in stores, break boxes, open locks and so on, but also learn how to rationalize and defend their actions. A thief will be accompanied by another thief for a certain amount of time before he commits himself. In other words, criminals also learn skills and gain experience.

5) The specific direction of motives and drives is learned from the definition of the legal codes as favorable or unfavorable. In some societies an individual is surrounded by people who without exception define the rules of law as rules to obey, while in other places he is surrounded by people whose definitions are favorable to breaking the rules of law. Not everyone in our society agrees that laws must be obeyed. Some people define the rules of law as unimportant.

6) A person becomes delinquent because of an excess of definitions favorable to violation of law over definitions unfavorable to violation of law. This is the key principle of differential association, the main direction of this theory. In other words, studying criminal behavior is not simply a matter of relationships with bad friends. However, studying criminal behavior depends on how many definitions we study which favorable for lawlessness as opposed to unfavorable definitions for lawlessness.

7) Differential associations may vary in frequency, duration, priority, and intensity. The degree to which a person’s associations/definitions will result in crime is related to the frequency of contact, the duration and meaning of the association/definition to the individual.

8) The process of learning criminal behavior by association with criminal and anticriminal patterns involves all of the mechanisms that are involved in any other learning. Studying patterns of criminal behavior is very much like studying conventional patterns of behavior and is not simply a matter of observation and imitation.

9) While criminal behavior is an expression of general needs and values, it is not explained by those general needs and values, since noncriminal behavior is an expression of the same needs and values. Shop thieves steal to get what they want. Other people work to get what they want. Motives – frustration, desire to accumulate wealth and social status, low self-concept and such explain both criminal and non-criminal behavior.

Criticism to Differential Association

1) Why doesn’t everyone who is associated with more criminal patterns of behavior become a criminal?

2) Does this theory really explain all crimes, maybe it can be applied to theft, but what about murders caused by anger of jealousy?

3) Why are some people who study patterns of criminal behavior not involved in criminal activity?

4) This theory explains how criminal behavior is learned, but it doesn’t explain how criminal techniques and definitions first existed? Or in another word, this theory doesn’t explain to us how the first criminal became criminal.

Source:

Yesmil Anwar and Adang, 2010, Kriminologi, PT. Refika Aditama, Bandung.

Topo Santoso, S.H.,M.H., and Eva Achjani Zulfa, S.H., 2009, Kriminologi, Rajawali Pers, Jakarta.

by Dharma Na Gara

Autopsy

An autopsy (examination of the corpse) is the best opportunity to obtain evidence in the investigation. This is very important as evidence in the form of expert testimony regarding the victim’s injuries, especially in cases of rape or other sex crimes.

In this case, a pathological (forensic) doctor and a toxicologist are needed. Sometimes it is also necessary to examine the victim’s cloth.

Post-mortem results sometimes produce very clear evidence to help to reconstruct the background and how was the victim’s death. According to Weston and Wells (1970: 63, 64), the results of an autopsy are often:

• Death time of the victim;
• Matters of injuries resulting in death;
• Other injuries found which are chronic diseases of the victim;
• Weapons or tools that caused death;
• Whether the body has been transferred after death;
• The amount of alcohol in the blood;
• Stomach contents/entrails, to give an indication of the time between the victim’s last meal and death and what was eaten;
• Indications of virginity, sexual knowledge, rape or pregnancy (female victims), sexual deviations (male victims);
• Evidence of blood, hair, or other signs that are not from the victim.

For more information, please consult your problem with us.

Source:

Dr. Andi Hamzah, S.H., 1986, Pengusutan Perkara Kriminal Melalui Sarana Teknik dan Sarana Hukum, Ghalia Indonesia, Jakarta.

by Dharma Na Gara

Dactyloscopy

Dactyloscopy origin from the Greek words daktulos, which means finger and skopioo, which means observing. So it literally means observing fingerprints.

The importance of fingerprints has been known to people for centuries. Found in Babylon a finger-stamped clay coin. In China also known as clay like that, during the Tang dynasty known trade contacts with fingerprints (thumbprint) (618-907). But fingerprints since centuries ago have not been used for practical purposes.

Professor Marcello Malpighi, an Italian anatomist in 1686 wrote about the edges of fingerprints. It shows the ability to draw straight lines and spirals at the edges of the fingers. But this knowledge was not developed further. His contemporaries, Dr. Nehemiah Grew with his book The Description and Use of the Pores in the Skin of the Hands and Feel, London, 1684, followed by G. Bidloo of the Netherlands in 1685, Christion J.H. Hintze of Germany in 1707 and Bernard S. Albinus of Germany in 1764.

In 1880 Sir Francis Galtom, a British anthropologist who is often called the founder of dactyloscopy, introduced the first scientific method of classifying fingerprint forms.

In 1882, the first official fingerprint record was made in the United States, when Gilber Thompsom wrote his order with his own fingerprint to avoid forgery.

Fingerprints are classified into 3 major groups, namely group L (from the word Loops, meaning hooks, and W from the word Whorls, meaning round). Group L is further divided into three groups, namely hooks, bow and pole bow. While the W group is divided into 5 more groups, namely circles, side pockets, twin hooks, inner pockets and extraordinary pictures, the third group is Arches (meaning: arches) which are further divided into flat (plai) and looks a like tent (tented).

For more information, please consult your problem with us.

Source:

Dr. Andi Hamzah, S.H., 1986, Pengusutan Perkara Kriminal Melalui Sarana Teknik dan Sarana Hukum, Ghalia Indonesia, Jakarta.